Apple could sell a billion iPads if they had approached it as a standalone product instead of an expensive luxury accessory to your full-featured desktop computer/laptop. The iPad already does 90% of what 90% of consumers use their home computers for, and does most of it better. But can a poor college kid or grandparent not wanting to spend a grand on a computer opt for a $499 iPad instead? Nope. But if Apple filled that remaining 10% of required computer tasks, it sure could.

1. It has to function solo, without the requirement that you sync it with a real computer. Since there is no optical drive for loading media, at the very least it should allow the user to input their iTunes account info and the iPad would automatically re-download all of their purchased items from the store directly. And since space is limited, it'd have to let you delete purchased media to free up space and re-download them at any time. The xBox 360 does this, so there's no reason the iPad couldn't too. Users should be able to plug their iPod into their iPad, and have the two sync directly to one another. Eliminate the expensive middle man, and the number of potential customers is endless.

2. It has to be able to print. If it can't send a document to a printer, it's a non-starter for the education market and college students. But if it could print, that opens a huge market. Apple's already offering a physical keyboard accessory; in three years when iPad's sell for $299, if point 1 and 2 were met there could be an iPad on every student desk in the world.

3. It needs basic photo-manipulation capabilities. They'll sell you an adapter to load your digital photos directly into the iPad, but all you can do then is look at them and share them electronically as-is. If they added basic photo-manipulation (cropping, levels, white balance, retouching), as well as the ability to print, the iPad would be a killer start-to-finish photography toolkit. Since they created fantastic versions of the entire iWork suite for iPad, I don't think photo-manipulation is asking too much.

4. Multi-tasking and Flash support. These things being missing from an expensive add-on to your real computer is tolerable, but if the iPad were to be a standalone product you'd have to let people run a chat application and word processor at the same time. And Flash is a requirement to experience all of the web; I don't know how Steve Jobs can surf the web with giant gaping holes in the middle of pages and claim he's getting the full experience.

If the iPad had these things, it could do 100% of what 90% of consumers do with their home computers. And as a standalone device, it really would be a netbook killer. Apple has made the mistake of assuming netbooks are dominantly purchased as a secondary computer; more likely, a huge segment of the netbook market are consumers attracted to the entry-level pricepoint. And since Apple has no interest in selling complete Macs (as in with a monitor) in the sub $999 price range, a full-featured iPad would be tapping a new market. A market of consumers that can't or don't want to spend $1,000 just to do basic tasks.

As the iPad functions now, the only potential customers are those who already own a full-fledged computer; and since 2 out of 3 computer sales are laptops, only 1 out of 3 computer owners can't already comfortably surf the web from their couch. The rest of us have to decide if we want to pay extra for a device that does 90% of what we do at home already, while that Mac we spent thousands on collects dust in the corner until we need to perform that other 10% of tasks.

I think Apple probably considered something like the points you've made.

But...

1. If a person needs those few things, then Apple wants them to pass on the iPad and buy an iBook. In the case you outlined, an iBook fits the bill.

2. Printing (to a networked printer) is a software feature... it MAY be there... they've not said one way or the other yet.

3. Apple can sell the budding photo-manipulator a different product instead of an iPad that does that job quite well... an iBook.

4. The screen is still a bit small for TRUE multitasking... but if apps can "save state" and launch fast... well... that's pretty close. As for Flash, I've got THAT disabled on my iMac and PowerBook and don't miss it... why the heck would I want it crashing my iPad?

Now, I agree that those features would make the iPad even better, I just don't think they are NEEDED for it to be a bigger hit than the iPhone was/is (hotcakes). In short, the iPad just isn't meant to be a stand-alone product. Apple expects it to be bought as a supplement to an iBook/iMac. For those that can't afford TWO products, Apple will be happy to sell them JUST the iBook

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cory Bauer

...only 1 out of 3 computer owners can't already comfortably surf the web from their couch...

A "Laptop" computer only allows you to surf from the couch... it doesn't allow you to COMFORTABLY surf from the couch.

From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...

I think Apple probably considered something like the points you've made.

But...

1. If a person needs those few things, then Apple wants them to pass on the iPad and buy an iBook. In the case you outlined, an iBook fits the bill.

2. Printing (to a networked printer) is a software feature... it MAY be there... they've not said one way or the other yet.

3. Apple can sell the budding photo-manipulator a different product instead of an iPad that does that job quite well... an iBook.

4. The screen is still a bit small for TRUE multitasking... but if apps can "save state" and launch fast... well... that's pretty close. As for Flash, I've got THAT disabled on my iMac and PowerBook and don't miss it... why the heck would I want it crashing my iPad?

Now, I agree that those features would make the iPad even better, I just don't think they are NEEDED for it to be a bigger hit than the iPhone was/is.

For the market that Apple is missing, spending $1,000 instead of $500 is not an option. And because the iPad is so close to being able to achieve everything most people need in a home computer, it's a damn shame there's just a short-list of dealbreakers. These are just flat-out lost sales, because the consumers I'm talking about were never going to be Mac owners anyway.

For the market that Apple is missing, spending $1,000 instead of $500 is not an option. And because the iPad is so close to being able to achieve everything most people need in a home computer, it's a damn shame there's just a short-list of dealbreakers. These are just flat-out lost sales, because the consumers I'm talking about were never going to be Mac owners anyway.

By that argument, Apple is missing out on SO MANY SALES by not making a $499 laptop... or a $29 mp3 player... or a $299 desktop...

From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...

By that argument, Apple is missing out on SO MANY SALES by not making a $499 laptop... or a $29 mp3 player... or a $299 desktop...

Completely different arguments. All of the limitations I've outlined are software based. I'm not suggesting that they sell $600 of hardware for $300, or strip hardware away to reach a lower pricepoint.

No, it's an OS issue. The iPhone OS doesn't support printing. The Newton OS did from any application that took advantage of that core service. Print, fax, email, beam, all from the same drop down menu in every app, in every document. 15 years ago. It was easy to take notes, record sounds, draw, etc. It did email, web surf, etc, and the iPhone should do everything the Newton could but it can't. The iPad is a tablet computer running a fscking mobile phone operating system. The iPhone OS may be the best mobile phone OS yet, but it's not enough for this device. I have a MacBook Pro, an iPhone, and I don't need an iPad. That's too much overlap. It doesn't do enough. There are many phones that do as much and more. Yes, Phones.

I think that despite the low price, the iPad is a luxury product. It's an electronic photo viewer, a video viewer, a document viewer, a web surfer and an email machine, and an iPod / MP3 player. It's not even that great at communication do to no forward facing or multi-postional camera ala Sony Vaio laptops, but it can't multitask so you can't receive a Skype call or email or iChat call if you are photo viewing or video watching or document reading. It can only do most, but not all, of what a smartphone can do, even at it's great size.

You know for most of the things you mentioned, there are Apps for that.

Yep there is.

1. I have an iPhone, a few times, I've deleted an app and then re downloaded it from the phone, yes, you go back to the store and press 'Buy', but it realises you have already paid for it and doesn't charge you. (Disclaimer: I don't know if the same applies for other media from the store, but for apps, you redownload for free).

2. Printing support has been talked about for OS 3.2 or 4.0. Wait and see. Meanwhile, there are apps for that.

3. Apps for that, at least iPhone apps that will work, I'd imagine a lot of them will get iPad specific updates, on a par with the Brushes app shown at the keynote, which was impressive for a few weeks work transferring the iPhone Brushes app.

4. Multitasking may still be brought in with OS 4.0. But as its a version of iPhone OS, the jailbreak community will be all over it anyway.

5. HTML5, H264, CSS, jQuery etc. will do most, if not all, of what flash can do. Flash will hopefully die a horrible death soon.

Apple could sell a billion iPads if they had approached it as a standalone product instead of an expensive luxury accessory to your full-featured desktop computer/laptop. The iPad already does 90% of what 90% of consumers use their home computers for, and does most of it better. But can a poor college kid or grandparent not wanting to spend a grand on a computer opt for a $499 iPad instead? Nope. But if Apple filled that remaining 10% of required computer tasks, it sure could.

I think Apple probably considered something like the points you've made.

But...

1. If a person needs those few things, then Apple wants them to pass on the iPad and buy an iBook. In the case you outlined, an iBook fits the bill.

2. Printing (to a networked printer) is a software feature... it MAY be there... they've not said one way or the other yet.

3. Apple can sell the budding photo-manipulator a different product instead of an iPad that does that job quite well... an iBook.

4. The screen is still a bit small for TRUE multitasking... but if apps can "save state" and launch fast... well... that's pretty close. As for Flash, I've got THAT disabled on my iMac and PowerBook and don't miss it... why the heck would I want it crashing my iPad?

Now, I agree that those features would make the iPad even better, I just don't think they are NEEDED for it to be a bigger hit than the iPhone was/is (hotcakes). In short, the iPad just isn't meant to be a stand-alone product. Apple expects it to be bought as a supplement to an iBook/iMac. For those that can't afford TWO products, Apple will be happy to sell them JUST the iBook

A "Laptop" computer only allows you to surf from the couch... it doesn't allow you to COMFORTABLY surf from the couch.

none of those things were EVER needed to make this a hit success. iWork wasn't even needed, but its there, and makes it 10X better than without it.

Completely different arguments. All of the limitations I've outlined are software based. I'm not suggesting that they sell $600 of hardware for $300, or strip hardware away to reach a lower pricepoint.

But software costs $$ to develop ... how is that different from spending $$ to buy parts?

From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...

But software costs $$ to develop ... how is that different from spending $$ to buy parts?

Internal software development can be written off since employee salaries are factored into annual operating costs regardless of what project they are working on. When a company releases a product they don't tally up the number of man hours internal employees spent on the project and factor it into their profit margins on the device. If they did, the iPad would cost four times what it does now, considering the project was rumored to have gone back to the drawing board several times and has been in development for at least three years.

Hardware components are an actual external, additional cost. Not an operating expense. When they buy hardware to build devices and have them assembled, they owe other companies money. When they ask their already-getting-paid employees to write printer drivers for the iPad, there's no added cost to build an iPad.

I generally agree with the OP, except with regard to Flash. Flash is crap and will soon be gone from the web. HTML5 is killing Flash and that's a good thing. I would be less likely to buy an iPad if it supported Flash.

Right. The iPad is not a replacement device. It is a complimentary device. Look at the Kindle. You can read Kindle books on your iPhone or on your laptop. So what it is it that makes the Kindle appeal to consumers? It is a light, easy to hold device that you can carry around just like you would a book. The iPad obviously takes this idea MUCH further. Would you rather sit in your chair or in a coffee shot with a laptop to simply read, watch movies, or browse the web or with an iPad. Easy answer, imo.

And the iPad will also appeal to folks who don't even own computers (yes, they do exist). Like the Wii expanded gaming to non-gamers, I think the iPad has the potential to do the same for non-computer users.
For me, I can easily see myself sticking my iPad into my bag next to my Macbook and pulling it out when I want to do simple consuming of games,internet, books, and movies/music. That is what it is designed to do. So why do people keep listing things that laptops/netbooks can do that the iPad can't? I just don't think those folks get the concept at all.

Photo-manipulation? I'm not sure the OP understands what 90% of computer users actually do with computers.

Even grandma wants to remove red-eye and crop her digital photos.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevegmu

Why would anyone want to use an iPad as a desktop or laptop replacement?

Because a lot of people don't spend more than iPad pricing on their home computer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevegmu

It is neither.

And yet as I outlined, it's very, very close.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisClement

You seem to want it to do both, and for cheap. Apple products are not for you.

I'm not talking about for me. I'm talking about for all the people who are going to buy netbooks instead, the market Apple is supposedly going after with the iPad. The only people this Apple product is for are people who already own Apple products and have money burning a hole in their pockets.

I think Apple needs to do something with MobileMe, a Time Capsule & the Keyboard Dock to position the iPad as a 'stand-alone' device

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevegmu

The top of the line iPad with all the accessories, TC and MobileMe membership would cost about the same as a MacBook, and not be nearly as functional.

Not an apples to apples comparison (pun totally intended!), since adding a Time Capsule & MobileMe membership to a MacBook would also drive the price up

As for functionality, I would think the changed form-factor (single-plane vs. dual-plane/hinged) actually adds a certain ease-of-use functionality to the iPad

Besides, the point I was working towards was the moving of the iPad to a stand-alone device classification

As has been said time & time again, for what a vast majority of the computer using population actually do, a stand-alone iPad would be the perfect device. Ease-of-use computer intended for casual computing in a relaxed manner; no muss, no fuss

Not an apples to apples comparison (pun totally intended!), since adding a Time Capsule & MobileMe membership to a MacBook would also drive the price up

As for functionality, I would think the changed form-factor (single-plane vs. dual-plane/hinged) actually adds a certain ease-of-use functionality to the iPad

Besides, the point I was working towards was the moving of the iPad to a stand-alone device classification

As has been said time & time again, for what a vast majority of the computer using population actually do, a stand-alone iPad would be the perfect device. Ease-of-use computer intended for casual computing in a relaxed manner; no muss, no fuss

A Time Capsule, Mobile Me and keyboard would be needed to make the iPad a stand-alone device. The MB is already a stand-alone device, so wouldn't need them to be 'whole.'

Apple doesn't want the iPad to be a stand-alone device- thus the limitation on drive size. It is to be between an iPhone and MacBook, not a MB replacement.

We're all speculating, but I dint hunk apple is even targeting this as a stand alone device. I believe it's MEANT to be a supplement to your "real" computer.
Yep, it's pricey. Yep, it doesn't do everything. But it'll still sell like hotcakes. The iPhone is expensive, doesn't do much without a computer running iTunes, but it's still the hottest smartphone on the market. The same could be said about iPods. The iPad is gonna have the same appeal.

From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, "Look at that!" -...

Then I'm betting grandma will get her wish when an app is made available for her to buy and do just that. Out of the box, the iPad is targeted for certain activities, but with the App store the functionality can be extended in limitless ways.

Quote:

I'm not talking about for me. I'm talking about for all the people who are going to buy netbooks instead, the market Apple is supposedly going after with the iPad. The only people this Apple product is for are people who already own Apple products and have money burning a hole in their pockets.

So....only Apple users want to browse the web, watch movies, listen to music, read books, play games, and download apps? I don't get why only Apple users would buy this? It does exactly what most computer owners want and it does so in comfortable, easy to hold format. Apple owners only? Hardly.

No, that's far too complex and confusing for Grandma. Grandma wants ME to do it for her! And then watch the results on her beautiful iPad.
And I've got a full-featured Mac to do it with. A hundred times faster than Grandma ever could on an iPad.

'Grandma' defined as the over eighties. The fastest growing demographic in the next decades in the rich western/'first' world.

The only people this Apple product is for are people who already own Apple products and have money burning a hole in their pockets.

This product is targeted at BOTH Apple & Windows users, just like the iPods & iPhones Apple currently offers

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevegmu

A Time Capsule, Mobile Me and keyboard would be needed to make the iPad a stand-alone device. The MB is already a stand-alone device, so wouldn't need them to be 'whole.'

But even with a MacBook, one might have the need (or want) for a MobileMe account, and having a Time Capsule is a good idea from a backup perspective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevegmu

Apple doesn't want the iPad to be a stand-alone device- thus the limitation on drive size. It is to be between an iPhone and MacBook, not a MB replacement.

I think the limitation on drive size is more a matter of keeping initial costs down, which will lead to more sales of the product. As volume of sales go up, and the price of flash RAM goes down, drive sizes will increase without pushing the final cost of the product up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot

We're all speculating, but I dint hunk apple is even targeting this as a stand alone device. I believe it's MEANT to be a supplement to your "real" computer.

I think that the iPad being a 'complimentary' device is just a short-term smoke screen, intended to get the product out there in the public eye. Apple will use the first (and possibly second) generation of this device to 'feel the waters' as it were, to see how the majority of computer users react to a controlled system. I believe there are plenty of end users who don't care about what is happening 'under the hood' of their operating system, those who could care less about a file system (or even really understand the underlying concepts of a file system, for that matter), and those who do not feel the need to change & tweak their system for 'optimal performance'

Except the experience of driving a Mercedes or BMW is slightly different to driving a Toyota.

People have been saying similar things about the iPhone ever since it was introduced, how many years of people using iPhones, iPod Touch's and the forthcoming iPad to dominate mobile Internet use, does it take for detractors to realise that these products are more than "fashion statements".

Quote:

Originally Posted by davesw

People are going to buy the iPad because it's going to be one of the biggest fashion accessory in the world. People don't care whether the iPad can multitask, support flash, etc.

They'll buy the iPad for the same reason they buy a BMW or a Mercedes instead of a Toyota.

Sounds like i'm joking but it's true.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.

1. Agree, we should at least be allowed to download/save/delete files (music, video, images, ...) without needing to sync with iTunes
2. Agree <- maybe it is already in iWork, we don't know yet
3. Agree <- a 3rd party app might make it happen
4. Multitouch would be nice, but Flash never!

Except the experience of driving a Mercedes or BMW is slightly different to driving a Toyota.

People have been saying similar things about the iPhone ever since it was introduced, how many years of people using iPhones, iPod Touch's and the forthcoming iPad to dominate mobile Internet use, does it take for detractors to realise that these products are more than "fashion statements".

oh i totally agree that the iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch are great/revolutionary devices.

The iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch are obviously more than just a fashion accessory. What i was trying to say with my post is that theres a lot of factors that will make iPad a hit. product, marketing, distribution..etc. and just the fact that there are ALOT of people out there who will buy the iPad just because it's a beautiful sexy device they can bring with them anywhere they want to go. for some people IT IS a fashion statement. Which is probably good for Apple.

Apple could sell a billion iPads if they had approached it as a standalone product instead of an expensive luxury accessory to your full-featured desktop computer/laptop.

And suffer like all other netbook makers with cannibalization of their laptop sales. I don't think they want to do this.

Quote:

The iPad already does 90% of what 90% of consumers use their home computers for, and does most of it better.

And at only $499...what a steal.

Quote:

1. It has to function solo, without the requirement that you sync it with a real computer. Since there is no optical drive for loading media, at the very least it should allow the user to input their iTunes account info and the iPad would automatically re-download all of their purchased items from the store directly. And since space is limited, it'd have to let you delete purchased media to free up space and re-download them at any time. The xBox 360 does this, so there's no reason the iPad couldn't too. Users should be able to plug their iPod into their iPad, and have the two sync directly to one another. Eliminate the expensive middle man, and the number of potential customers is endless.

This is no different from the iPhone or iPod. Almost everyone has a computer and oh..yeah...apple would STILL like to sell computers...

Quote:

2. It has to be able to print. If it can't send a document to a printer, it's a non-starter for the education market and college students. But if it could print, that opens a huge market. Apple's already offering a physical keyboard accessory; in three years when iPad's sell for $299, if point 1 and 2 were met there could be an iPad on every student desk in the world.

Point 1 is silly and point 2 moot. The iPad will be able to print. Heck, the iphone has apps to print and there's no reason not to expect native printing support in mobile OSX given they've bothered to port iWork to the iPad.

Quote:

3. It needs basic photo-manipulation capabilities. They'll sell you an adapter to load your digital photos directly into the iPad, but all you can do then is look at them and share them electronically as-is. If they added basic photo-manipulation (cropping, levels, white balance, retouching), as well as the ability to print, the iPad would be a killer start-to-finish photography toolkit. Since they created fantastic versions of the entire iWork suite for iPad, I don't think photo-manipulation is asking too much.

If they don't port iLife I'm sure they'll be an app for that pretty quick anyway. In any case, there's not enough storage on the iPad to make it really worthwhile.

Quote:

4. Multi-tasking and Flash support. These things being missing from an expensive add-on to your real computer is tolerable, but if the iPad were to be a standalone product you'd have to let people run a chat application and word processor at the same time. And Flash is a requirement to experience all of the web; I don't know how Steve Jobs can surf the web with giant gaping holes in the middle of pages and claim he's getting the full experience.

Multi-tasking will appear when the iPhone gets multitasking. That could be the next hardware rev. It could be the one after that.

yeah, except when ask if they want a Kindle, Nook or iPad...most people will say Kindle. That is if they only want basic web, email and primarily reading books. Kindle's battery lasts a week without charge, it's a standalone device and costs less than the cheapest iPad.

I totally agree with Cory's Origianl post on this. If this was a standalone device and did all that Cory wishes, they would double, if not Triple the sales of these. They already have the accessory keyboard for a more Desktop feel as well. Why not have a sync station integrated (like the Time Capsule or something similar) for added storage.

I'd really like to see an alternate accessory keyboard that alow you a more comfortable experience on the coach for typing. I've tried one on the coach and that sleeve thing just doesn't cut the mustard. They need something more like a laptop like experience for couch surfing. There is a company that makes one, but it's still in the development phase.

I also wanted to add that if Apple is going to maintain this device as a "Desktop/Laptop Accessory", they really need to allow it to ACCESS MY LOCAL NETWORK! it just makes so much sense to do this. Think of the Enterprise experience of using this device in meetings! or even at home, let the iPad be truly an extention of my Desktop! If you're going to market it as an accessory, allow it to be an accessory to my computer.

I think the future is for the flat panel of a laptop or a Desktop to be removable for travel. When you unplug it, it functions as the current iPad does, like an OS lite. But when plugged into the CPU, it back to a fully functioning Mac.